RE: In Defense of a Non-Natural Moral Order
August 23, 2019 at 9:56 pm
(This post was last modified: August 23, 2019 at 10:12 pm by John 6IX Breezy.)
(August 22, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Meh, not really. Our moral umbrellas will probably get most of us killed. We have them because another organ evolved to find dinner.
I was thinking about your statement again. I'm wondering how it accounts for people having reasoning capacities that seem specific to norms? For example, evidence suggests that children and adults are better at reasoning about deontic conditionals (what one may or must not do) than indicative conditionals (more or less the truth of a statement). The tendency in children is to look for violations in deontic conditions and confirmations in indicative conditionals (Cummins, 1996). It seems strange to treat norms and morals as secondhand when reasoning about them appears to take center stage.
Reference: Cummins, D. D. (1996a). Evidence of deontic reasoning in 3- and 4-year-olds. Memory and Cognition, 24, 823–829